You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

no. not ann arbor. if UT's 10% auto admit
is scrapped... still, no. UNC Chapel Hill would
be more competitive to Ann Arbor based on
selectivity.

basically in this scenario, no university is
$150k better than UT if money's the first
main concern, and it probably is since a
thread was started.

of course if money isn't the biggest issue
and you have the means and believe in your
potential enough where $150k is insignificant,
in which case Columbia or any other school
may be worth the $150k over UT.

but to put it in perspective, my cousin just
finished her undergrad this year from MIT,
and landed a job in chicago which gave her a summer stipend of $26,000

so again, depends on your major and field of
interest. and whether or not the industry you
want to go in to pays that.

No one will ever scoff at your school, and it will certainly be a "good school".

depends if you ever plan to leave texas...
there's a much bigger world out there.
and if you care to factor in international
perception of the school you went to.

there are still parts of the world, emerging
markets that still give 'brand value' to the
school you went to, allowing you to leverage
off the institution's name. how right or
wrong or silly it is, i don't really care, but
it still does exist. the old boys network
is still strong in parts of the world too.

every normal man must be tempted, at times,
to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag,
and begin slitting throats.
h.l. mencken

no. not ann arbor. if UT's 10% auto admit
is scrapped... still, no. UNC Chapel Hill would
be more competitive to Ann Arbor based on
selectivity.

Forget selectivity. In terms of quality of education and overall reputation, UT is definitely on par with Michigan. They are right in that same general "tier". Both very good state schools (Cal, Michigan, Texas, etc.). UT is pretty top notch. I'm not saying it's an Ivy, but it's a very good school.

NTJ's are the only types that have ever made me feel emo.
ENP's are the only types that have ever made me feel like a sensor.

There are two great days in a person's life - the day we are born and the day we discover why. --William Barclay

As far as state schools go, UC-Berkeley, UCLA and UM-Ann Arbor are in a tier of their own. UNC-Chapel Hill is almost on that level, but suffers a bit because of how much more highly nearby Duke is ranked. UT's not anywhere near that level, but it has its own ancillary benefits that arise from being the flagship university of the second-most populated state in the US.

At least back in the day (lol) when I went to school, a lot of the state schools rated quite highly in many programs. Since I as in the midwest at the time, and was also looking at engineering programs, I was mostly paying attention to the Big 10. University of WI at Madison, University of IL at Champaign-Urbana, and so on. Many were quite good as far as national ratings were concerned, and also viewed quite highly by employers in those fields.

And, at the time, U of IL (where I went) was in the top 10 for most engineering disciplines, if not top 3/5 ... beating out the Ivy leagues in many instances (in fact Ivy leagues, aside from MIT and maybe one other, weren't even in the running - it was predominantly state schools, led by UC Berkeley). Same went for certain other programs, although since I wasn't applying for those, I didn't pay attention to those ratings.

Even Illinois State University was well-known for its teaching/education program at the time. And, I think Speech Therapy too? (although I might be pulling that out of my butt, I don't know )

I guess I'm of the opinion that a good state school can match/top the Ivy leagues in most programs. Not all, of course, but most. Ivy leagues appear to just be the prestige factor, and also the whole networking thing (tied to perceived prestige). Again, only in some programs.

"...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

In other, if not most, fields, the Ivy League degree will absolutely provide a substantial advantage compared to alternatives. It's terribly unfair, but there are doors available to you as a Columbia grad that simply aren't there for a graduate of a state U, particularly in this day and age.

i don't agree with this, really. not as an undergraduate. if we are talking graduate school, medical school, law school, etc., than yes, but to be honest, as an undergraduate i don't think the name of your school matters nearly so much as what you did while you were there. if you're coming out of a state school with honors, publications, internships, awards, and connections, i think that's more significant than coming out of yale with a c transcript and little else.

Originally Posted by CzeCze

But, it is true, in your long range goals you wanna aim higher. Your last alma mater is most important in terms of networking and prestige and also training/education. Going to a cheaper maybe less prestigious state school then going to an Ivy for grad school looks better (yes, we're all snobs) and looks like a better investment of time, money, and studying than the reverse - going to an expensive prestigious undergrad but then a cheaper, less prestigious state school for grad school.

yeah.

Originally Posted by mmhmm

(correct me if i'm wrong) but i think the us is one
of the few countries in the world that you can't go
directly into Law or Medicine as an undergraduate.

so there's no such degree as LLB.

they have pre-law and pre-med.
and law/med school for the postgraduate

yes.

i have both lawyers and doctors in the close family, and was pre-med myself, and can vouch that many people are now advocating majoring in whatever the hell interests in undergrad you if you're set on pre-med or law anyway. besides the few requirements, med and law school will teach you everything you need to know - you do not need an undergrad major in chemistry to become a doctor. in fact, it even makes you more interesting and separates you from the pack if you are a japanese literature student and pre-med as well.

I guess I'm of the opinion that a good state school can match/top the Ivy leagues in most programs. Not all, of course, but most. Ivy leagues appear to just be the prestige factor, and also the whole networking thing (tied to perceived prestige).

I don't think anyone in their right mind will deny that you'll get just as high-quality of an education at a major state school as you will at an Ivy. After all, the information is the information, no matter whether you receive it in Cambridge, Mass. or Butte, Mt. It's possible to get an Ivy League education for free, provided you have access to a computer and an internet connection. As I mentioned, though, you don't go to an Ivy League school for the quality of information, or if you are, you're not going there for the right reasons.

Therefore, if you're going into the hard sciences, the decision is a simple one - you go to the university where they have the most intensive program that focuses on the sorts of questions that makes you the most excited. So, if you're into meteorology, you go to a school like Penn State, or the University of Oklahoma (my alma mater). If you're into experimental physics, do what you can to get to Berkeley. If you're into computing or theoretical physics, both Caltech and MIT are impressive options.

Outside of the hard sciences, I would argue that the long-term prestige and social benefits of going to an Ivy League school far outweigh possible short-term benefits, with a few caveats. If you want to study subjects like English or Philosophy, even though your degree will get you far, the costs are essentially prohibitive, and they're that way for a reason: going to school for four years to talk about the books they like and leave with a Harvard or Yale degree is a privilege of the upper-middle and the upper class, and we'd do well to remember that. Besides, all the more interesting discussions are held elsewhere; Ivy League schools are far too Establishment.

For business or government/political science, there is no reason whatsoever one should choose a non-Ivy over an Ivy. The prestige and connections make careers.

i don't agree with this, really. not as an undergraduate. if we are talking graduate school, medical school, law school, etc., than yes, but to be honest, as an undergraduate i don't think the name of your school matters nearly so much as what you did while you were there. if you're coming out of a state school with honors, publications, internships, awards, and connections, i think that's more significant than coming out of yale with a c transcript and little else.

As far as I understand it, it's the complete opposite: the prestige bonus is almost entirely conferred upon undergraduates, and much attenuated for grad students. Even for those on a professorial track, the Ivy League bonus comes less from the prestige of the institution itself, than from the types of projects and research you are exposed to, not to mention the available financial resources. After a certain level, though, you start running into prestige barriers, especially when it comes to things like funding one's own projects. That's not nearly as much of a problem for the undergrads, provided that they developed a robust social network.